Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Michael Kors and Rolling Stone

I drop a leave a response whenever I especially enjoy a poston a website or I have something to valuable to contribute to the discussion.Usually it is triggered by the passion communicated in the article I looked at.And on this post "Laura Kaminker: Her own little fan club".I was actually excited enough to drop a thought :) I actually do have a couple of questions foryou if you usually do not mind. Could it be simply me or doesit give the impression like a few of the comments look as if they areleft by brain dead visitors? :-P And, if you are writing on other places, I'd like to keep up with you. Could you list every one of all your communal sites like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?

A lot of comments are left by people promoting their own things. That's fine. Some of it is sex stories. As a lesbian, that doesn't bother me. Are they brain dead?

I wouldn't characterize anyone leaving a comment that way necessarily. If they strongly disagree with me, they aren't brain dead, they just strongly disagree. Even if they hate me, they aren't brain dead.

What I hope is not the case is that it's someone you may not be able to understand. Not everyone visiting is from the US. I used to follow the comments and there was one that really threw me. I was talking about it and C.I. said copy and paste it and send it to her. It was some form of Chinese. It was a sweet note about the post. So that was great and reminded me that not all my readers are comfortable writing in English. And that's fine. Welcome to all. In addition, Blogger/Blogspot has added a feature which allows you to see what countries you're readers are from -- it's just a world map and you've got degrees of green in areas where you're readers are. I hope that helps.

I help out at Third Estate Sunday Review but that's it. I mean, I'll do a group post from time to time. But I am not on Facebook, Twitter or Likned in.

I hope that answered your questions. Thank you for asking. Usually, Keesha or someone else will pass something on from the comments if they feel it needs a response from me. I feel I babble here and the comments are where others can have their say. I don't police generally speaking. If a reader informs me that there is a racist or sexist or homophobic comment, I'll generally delete it.

Generally? As a Black lesbian, I sometimes believe it's good to let certain comments stand so that we can all get what it's like to be a member of a minority group.

Wednesday, July 17, 2013. Chaos and violence continue,rumors swirl that
Nouri's hold on power is slipping, Barzani speaks of his two-year
extension, Ayad Allawi calls for the government to protect the citizens
of Diyala Province, the US House Judiciary Committee discusses spying,
and more.

This morning, US House Rep Ted Deutch noted he worries "about the
balance between legitimate security
needs and the constituationally protected rights of all Americans" and
declared, "I believe it's time to rexemine the Patriot Act, insert
greater accountability into the FISA court and ensure our laws cannot be
interpreted behind the backs of the American public."

He was speaking at the House Judiciary Committee hearing on FISA. The
Committee Chair is Bob Goodlatte and the Ranking Member is John
Conyers. The first panel was made up of DoJ's James Cole, NSA's John C.
Inglis, Office of Director of National Intelligence's Robert S. Litt
and the FBI's Stephanie Douglas. The second panel was Steptoe &
Johnson, LLP's Stewart Baker, the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer and CNSS' Kate
Martin.

Storyteller Stewart Baker babbled before the House Judiciary Committee
and made the claim that FISA was 'constrained' under Bill Clinton and
this resulted in the "wall" between intelligence and law enforcement
which prevented the capture of the 9-11 hijackers. Jamie Gorelick, tear
down this wall! Are we really back to that nonsense? (If there was a wall, it dates back to the Reagan era.) Baker loves fairy tales. Let's deal with how the so-called wall allegedly caused 9-11. From SourceWatch:

Coleen Rowley, who served as chief counsel of the FBI's Minneapolis field office, "in a 13-page memo, outlined how FBI headquarters thwarted agents' attempts to investigate Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged 20th hijacker. The 'bombshell memo' led bureau chief Robert Mueller
to reorganize the agency. Rowley testified before the Senate Judiciary
Committee in June about the FBI bureaucracy that frustrates agents'
attempts at innovative investigation and mires them in paperwork." [1]

1) The
Minneapolis agents who responded to the call about Moussaoui's flight
training identified him as a terrorist threat from a very early point.
The decision to take him into custody on August 15, 2001, on the INS
"overstay" charge was a deliberate one to counter that threat and was
based on the agents' reasonable suspicions. While it can be
said that Moussaoui's overstay status was fortuitous, because it allowed
for him to be taken into immediate custody and prevented him receiving
any more flight training, it was certainly not something the INS
coincidentally undertook of their own volition. I base this on the
conversation I had when the agents called me at home late on the evening
Moussaoui was taken into custody to confer and ask for legal advice
about their next course of action. The INS agent was assigned to the
FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force and was therefore working in tandem
with FBI agents.

2)
As the Minneapolis agents' reasonable suspicions quickly ripened into
probable cause, which, at the latest, occurred within days of
Moussaoui's arrest when the French Intelligence Service
confirmed his affiliations with radical fundamentalist Islamic groups
and activities connected to Osama Bin Laden, they became
desperate to search the computer lap top that had been taken from
Moussaoui as well as conduct a more thorough search of his personal
effects. The agents in particular believed that Moussaoui signaled he
had something to hide in the way he refused to allow them to search his
computer.

3)
The Minneapolis agents' initial thought was to obtain a criminal search
warrant, but in order to do so, they needed to get FBI Headquarters'
(FBIHQ's) approval in order to ask for DOJ OIPR's approval to contact
the United States Attorney's Office in Minnesota. Prior to and even
after receipt of information provided by the French, FBIHQ personnel
disputed with the Minneapolis agents the existence of probable cause to
believe that a criminal violation had occurred/was occurring. As such,
FBIHQ personnel refused to contact OIPR to attempt to get the authority.
While reasonable minds may differ as to whether probable cause existed
prior to receipt of the French intelligence information, it was
certainly established after that point and became even greater with
successive, more detailed information from the French and other
intelligence sources. The two possible criminal violations initially
identified by Minneapolis Agents were violations of Title 18 United
States Code Section 2332b (Acts of terrorism transcending national
boundaries, which, notably, includes "creating a substantial risk of
serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any
structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the
United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any
structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the
United States") and Section 32 (Destruction of aircraft or aircraft
facilities). It is important to note that the actual search warrant
obtained on September 11th was based on probable cause of a violation of
Section 32.1 Notably also, the actual search warrant obtained on
September 11th did not include the French intelligence information.
Therefore, the only main difference between the information being
submitted to FBIHQ from an early date which HQ personnel continued to
deem insufficient and the actual criminal search warrant which a federal
district judge signed and approved on September 11th, was the fact
that, by the time the actual warrant was obtained, suspected terrorists
were known to have highjacked planes which they then deliberately
crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. To say then, as
has been iterated numerous times, that probable cause did not exist
until after the disasterous event occurred, is really to acknowledge
that the missing piece of probable cause was only the FBI's (FBIHQ's)
failure to appreciate that such an event could occur. The probable cause
did not otherwise improve or change. When we went to the United States
Attorney's Office that morning of September 11th, in the first hour
after the attack, we used a disk containing the same information that
had already been provided to FBIHQ; then we quickly added Paragraph 19
which was the little we knew from news reports of the actual attacks
that morning. The problem with chalking this all up to the "20-20
hindsight is perfect" problem, (which I, as all attorneys who have been
involved in deadly force training or the defense of various lawsuits are
fully appreciative of), is that this is not a case of everyone in the
FBI failing to appreciate the potential consequences. It is obvious,
from my firsthand knowledge of the events and the detailed documentation
that exists, that the agents in Minneapolis who were closest to the
action and in the best position to gauge the situation locally, did
fully appreciate the terrorist risk/danger posed by Moussaoui and his
possible co-conspirators even prior to September 11th. Even without
knowledge of the Phoenix communication (and any number of other
additional intelligence communications that FBIHQ personnel were privy
to in their central coordination roles), the Minneapolis agents
appreciated the risk. So I think it's very hard for the FBI to offer the
"20-20 hindsight" justification for its failure to act! Also
intertwined with my reluctance in this case to accept the "20-20
hindsight" rationale is first-hand knowledge that I have of statements
made on September 11th, after the first attacks on the World Trade
Center had already occurred, made telephonically by the FBI Supervisory
Special Agent (SSA) who was the one most involved in the Moussaoui
matter and who, up to that point, seemed to have been consistently,
almost deliberately thwarting the Minneapolis FBI agents' efforts (see
number 5). Even after the attacks had begun, the SSA in question was
still attempting to block the search of Moussaoui's computer,
characterizing the World Trade Center attacks as a mere coincidence with
Misseapolis' prior suspicions about Moussaoui.2

That's some of the letter. It is not about a 'wall,' it is about people
not doing their jobs. That was too much reality for someone who chose
to tell a fairy tale.

Ranking Members John Conyers was a rare bright spot on the hearing. He
noted, for example, of the secret spaying, "If it weren't for a couple
of people leaking, we wouldn't know any of this, as far as I'm
concerned."

His concerns included the legality of the collecting of data, more so
than "the uses to which it is put." He declared tracking everyone in
the country "for at least six years" was "probably the most disturbing
aspect."

Over the last six weeks it has become clear that the NSA is engaged
in far-reaching, intrusive, and unconstitutional surveillance of
Americans' communications.

Under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, the NSA is tracking every
single phone call made by a resident of the United States—who they
called, when they called them, for how long they spoke. Until recently
it was tracking ordinary Americans' Internet activity as well.

Under Section 702 of FISA, and on the pretext of monitoring people
outside the United States, the NSA is using Section 702 of FISA to build
massive databases of Americans' domestic and international
communications—not just so-called metadata, but content as well.

These programs have been made possible by huge advances in the
technology of surveillance, but in many respects they resemble the
generalized surveillance programs that led to the adoption of the Fourth
Amendment more than two hundred years ago. The FISA court orders
resemble general warrants, albeit general warrants for the digital age.That the NSA is engaged in this unconstitutional surveillance is the
result of defects both in the law itself and in the current oversight
system.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act affords the government
sweeping power to monitor the communications of innocent people.

Excessive secrecy has made congressional oversight difficult and public oversight impossible.

Intelligence officials have repeatedly misled the public, Congress,
and the courts about the nature and scope of the government's
surveillance activities.

Structural features of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
have prevented that court from serving as an effective guardian of
constitutional rights.

And the ordinary federal courts have improperly used the "state
secrets" and "standing" doctrines to place the NSA's activities beyond
the reach of judicial review.

To say that the NSA's activities present a grave danger to American
democracy is not an overstatement. Thirty-six years ago, after
conducting a comprehensive investigation into the intelligence abuses of
the previous decades, the Church Committee warned that inadequate
regulations on government surveillance "threaten[ed] to undermine our
democratic society and fundamentally alter its nature." This warning
should have even more resonance today than it did in 1976, because in
recent decades the NSA's resources have grown, statutory and
constitutional limitations have been steadily eroded, and the technology
of surveillance has become exponentially more powerful.Because the problem Congress confronts today has many roots, there is
no single solution to it. But there are a number of things that
Congress should do right away:

It should amend Sections 215 and 702 to expressly prohibit
suspicionless or "dragnet" monitoring or tracking of Americans'
communications.

It should require the executive to release basic information about
the government's use of foreign-intelligence-surveillance authorities,
including those relating to pen registers and national security letters.
The executive should be required to disclose, for each year:

How many times each of these provisions was used

How many individuals' privacy was implicated by the government's use of each provision

And, with respect to any dragnet, generalized, or bulk surveillance program, the types of information that were collected.

Congress should also require the publication of FISA court opinions
that evaluate the meaning, scope, or constitutionality of the
foreign-intelligence laws. The ACLU recently filed a motion before the
FISA court arguing that the publication of these opinions is required by
the First Amendment, but Congress need not wait for the FISA court to
act. Congress has the authority and the obligation to ensure that
Americans are not governed by a system of secret law.

Finally, Congress—and this Committee in particular—should hold
additional hearings to consider further amendments to FISA, including
amendments to make FISC proceedings more transparent.

Congress should not be indifferent to the government's accumulation
of vast quantities of sensitive information about American's lives. This
Committee in particular has a crucial role to play in ensuring that the
government's efforts to protect the country do not compromise the
freedoms that make the country worth protecting.Thank you.

Many, like Chair Gooelatte, didn't grasp why the officials continued to
insist that thei was a foreign affairs matter when it came to spying on
Americans making phone calls or sending e-mails to other Americans, and
both parties being inside the United States? Many words were used to
justify that, none of which made sense.

What's the take away? US House Rep Blake Farenthold noted that the
Fourth Amendment was seen as not being violated by the spying and the
First Amendment was not seen as being violated by the spying so possibly
the only time he has a reasonable expectation of privacy is with "a
letter i hand deliver to my wife in a schiff,"

The Glens Falls Post-Star reports
on Lt Gen Robert Caslen Jr becoming the "59th superintendent" at West
Point in a recent ceremony and notes, "Caslen is a 1975 West Point
graduate who has
commanded at every level from company through division. Most recently,
he was the Chief of the Office of Security Cooperation for Iraq."

Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could
result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on
training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to
[US] General [Robert L.] Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations
soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and
help with intelligence.

Nobody. They were happier, apparently, to call us out for repeatedly
noting it or for taking writers to task -- left writers for left
websites -- when they repeated the lie of all US troops being out of
Iraq. Paraphrasing one e-mailer (who is with an 'organization'
supposedly against war), "You know you're not really being helpful by
attacking [name deleted]. And Iraq is not the only issue in the world."

Really? It was the issue that put your laughable organization on the
map. And I guess you think it's helpful to ignore the fact that US
troops are being sent back into Iraq? That would explain your silence
and that of your organization's as well, right?

We're half way through July. Do you realize that in two months, we'll
be at the one year anniversary of Arango's report and no one wants to
deal with it on the left, no one wants to acknowledge it.

It's far more important to cover for Barack than it is to tell the truth, apparently.

It would be nice if any of the above could be discussed. Instead, our
left 'independent' media that always wants you to send it money can't be
bothered with covering these truths. When it comes to Iraq, so much
never gets covered. For example, a new World Health Organization study
side-steps a great deal. IPS reports: A long-awaited study on congenital birth defects by the World Health
Organization (WHO) and the Ministry of Health (MOH) in Iraq is expected
to be very extensive in nature. [. . .]The report will not examine the link between the prevalence of birth
defects and use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions used during the war
and occupation in Iraq, according to WHO.
A by-product of the uranium enrichment process, DU is prized by the
military for its use in ammunition that can punch through walls and
armoured tanks. The main problem, experts say, is that DU munitions
vaporise on contact, generating dust that is easily inhaled into the
lungs.
The WHO study will also not consider pollutants such as lead and
mercury as factors or variables, Syed Jaffar Hussain, representative and
head of mission for the WHO in Iraq, told IPS.
According to WHO, establishing a link between the prevalence of
congenital birth defects and exposure to DU would require further
research by competent agencies or institutions.
Discussion and preparation for the study that started in mid-2011 was
conducted in the wake of reports and individual studies conducted in
Iraq which found a significant increase in the prevalence of congenital
birth defects, says WHO.
Previous studies also pointed at some kind of correlation between
metal pollutants, possibly DU used in 2003 and 2004 during the U.S.
military attacks in Fallujah, with congenital birth defects in the
region.
However, the causes will not be part of the MOH and WHO study. And
this is what has invited criticism from some health experts and
scientists.

Caslen
had previously served as West Point's commandant, a top academy position
in charge of day-to-day operations of the cadets.

Also under-covered has been the prostitution. For years, the mainstream
press insisted there were no brothels in Iraq, certainly not in
Baghdad. No brothels in a war zone? That would be a modern first. Of
course, Off Our Backs wasn't afraid to report the truth and did report
it. There were brothels in Iraq, including Baghdad. Wassim Bassem (Al-Monitor) reports:

Raed Qais, a worker in a nightclub, confirmed to Al-Monitor
that the number of brothels in Baghdad has increased after being
limited to certain areas such as Midan, Kamaliyah and Abu Ghraib. They
have become active today in other areas in private homes that hold
semi-discreet socializing and sex parties, frequented by clients via a
network of relationships of “confidants,” their money and their
entourage.
Karima Hatem admitted to Al-Monitor that she has "worked in
the sex trade in Baghdad for around six years,” after a slump in demand
for goods in Diwaniyah forced her to move to the capital.
Heifa Hamid also moved around five years ago from the Fawar area of
Diwaniyah to Baghdad, where she works in a secret brothel in the Midan
area as part of a “work team” with Hatem.

As Adam Schreck (AP) notes
the violence is taking place during the holy month of Ramadan and that
you have to drop back to 2007 to find more violent deaths during this
month. Deutsche Welle notes the violence aimed at religious minorities:Churches are now regular recipients of bomb attacks - as they have been
for years. When Patriarch Louis Raphael I Sako became head of the
Chaldean Catholic Church in Iraq in March 2013, security authorities in
parts of Baghdad were on high alert. The patriarch, however, is the
leader of a congregation in decline.In addition to many Catholics, Christians of other denominations are
leaving Iraq. From what was once a group of roughly 1 million Christians
in the biblical land of Babylon, a few hundred thousand remain. Iraq's
other religious minorities have suffered a similar fate.Day-to-day life is particularly difficult for Mandeans, whose religion
accepts certain Old and New Testament figures - Adam, Noah, John the
Baptist, for example - but rejects Abraham, Moses, and Jesus Christ. The
religious community is based in southern Iraq, whence it traces its
origins for over 2,000 years to John the Baptist. Mandeans argue that
the Koran itself would define them as a "people of the book" - that is,
as adhering to a religion worthy of protection. Many Iraqi Muslims see
things otherwise.

When it comes to the last day of the year Mandaean (Kinsa and Zhli),
which means the meeting and cleansing, starting procedures and
preparations are not familiar by those around sons of this community
despite the fact that everyone living with each other within the unity
of Iraqi society, you see their different reactions between the critic
does not understand and collaborator or neutral, remains Alkrsh a
mystery worthy of respect and clarity .. is the concept of social comes
from the meaning of detention or i'tikaaf an Arabic term came from
i'tikaaf Mandaeans in their homes 36 hours starting from sunset on the
end of the year Mandaean (Kinsa and Zhli) until sunrise of the second
day of the year Mandaean new, on any two nights, either the concept
Mandean (Dhva Lord) Mendaúaan of the great feast that bears the stamp
worldly and socially mean big event where the statement is contained
(Dhva) with all the major events Mandaean (k Dhva Ed always, Dhva Hnina
.... etc. ) denote the divine events make up the panel configuration and
creation, and the word came specifically with the Lord on this occasion
the sense of the great and great is attributed to the Lord Almighty.
What is this event important to the Lord? Why is this i'tikaaf which is a
feature of that event is very old, and why is a holiday for Mendaúaan?
We will try to answer briefly by inference, religious texts in this
regard, as stated in the Court (and two thousand Tersr Asvaks,, a
thousand and twelve questions) of the preserves itself through
thirty-six hours would be attributed to me I am Abu archaeologist.

As Deutsche Welle notes,
many of Iraq's religious minorities flee to northern Iraq or flee Iraq
period. The refugee crisis has not disappeared just because the world's
press has lost interest. All Iraq News reports today that 1,000 Iraqi refugees arrived in Hanover, Germany today. All Iraq News quotes Iraqiya leader Ayad Allawi stating:

The
return of the extremism and displacing the citizens in Diyala province
will result in the sectarian conflict and destroying the social texture
in Iraq. The
weak governmental performance and the accurate mechanism of the
Ministry of Interior to deal with the situation in addition to the lack
of the national accord and the real partnership, are the main reasons
behind the unstable security situation and the increase of the terrorist
attacks in Ramadan. While
condemning displacing the citizens in Diyala and the other provinces,
we call the government to show its stance over this dangerous issue and
to exert efforts to improve it.

NINA reports, "Speaker Osama Najafi called for holding a public hearing on Thursday in
parliament in order to deter violators and terrorists in Diyala province
and easing tensions to overcome the crisis and stop the forced
displacement of citizens in a number of areas of the province." Alsumaria adds
that the Free Patriotic Movement is joining the call as explained by
their leader Massoud Zangana who states that the citizens of Diyala are
in need of help.

The losses which Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki’s
party suffered in the recent provincial elections stand as an indictment
both of failed political alliances at national level, and also of poor
economic and welfare delivery at local level, according to commentators
interviewed by IWPR.

Elections were held in 12
governorates on April 20, while two more in Anbar and Nineveh were
delayed to June 20 because of instability. No elections were held in the
three Kurdish provinces or in disputed Kirkuk.

What
really mattered to Maliki’s State of Law party was winning the nine
mainly Shia governorates that constitute its power-base.

But
in the event, its dominance was eroded by two other Shia parties – the
Muwatin Coalition and the Sadrist Movement – plus a number of smaller
groups. From a position where it controlled all nine councils through
strong relative majorities – thus ensuring that its candidate was
selected as provincial governor – Maliki’s party lost five and had a
much reduced lead in the other four.

Nouri lives in denial and apparently cultivates it within State of Law. All Iraq News quotes
State of Law MP Sadiq al-Labban declaring that there will not be
another crisis between Baghdad and Erbil. Not only have the for-show
meetings not ended the current crises between Baghdad and Erbil, but
there are emerging problems. NINA notes
that Kurdistan Alliance MP Vian Dekeel is objecting to the push to pass
"important and disputed laws in the House of Representatives in one
basket deal." That puts them in direct opposition to State of Law.

The instability stems mainly from the sectarian and ethnic divides
engulfing the country. The disputes between Sunnis and Shiites, as well
as the Shiite-dominated central government and the Kurdish Regional
Government (KRG), have been particularly tense over the last year. Yet,
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki
visited northern Iraq on June 10 for the first time in more than two
years, and Masoud Barzani, president of the KRG, reciprocated on July 7
by visiting Baghdad. These are not just symbolic visits.While
al-Maliki’s move was considered a first step toward resolving a
long-running dispute over oil and land as well as an attempt to secure
Kurdish support to relieve some of the pressure his Shiite-led
government is feeling from the Sunnis and the surge in sectarian
violence spilling over from Syria, Barzani’s visit aimed at a much
larger goal of “national reconciliation,” with an underlying strategy to
move to Baghdad replacing Celal Talabani as president. Talabani’s term
is finishing in April 2014, and he has been in intensive care in Germany
since he suffered a stroke in December 2012.The fact that the
al-Maliki government lost its popularity after the provincial elections
in April 2013 forces him to form new coalitions before the forthcoming
elections in 2014. While Sunni
groups accuse him because of his policies marginalizing Sunnis, mending
ties with the Kurds would become the best alternative for al-Maliki.Barzani’s
term as the president of the KRG was extended two more years on June
30, with the cooperation of his Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and
Talabani’s Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), despite others opposed
the extension. The future of this cooperation between the KDP and the
PUK will depend on the result of upcoming parliamentary elections in
September 2013 and the health of Talabani. Thus Barzani is focusing on
working with the central government to strengthen his position.

Alsumaria reports
that KRG President Massoud Barzani declared yesterday that he would
continue on as president on a temporary basis while waiting for the KRG
Parliament to vote on the amendments to the Constitution -- those
amendments include adding two years on to Barzani's current term. He
states that the KRG will not permit a lifetime president.

There are several issues at play here including the current instability
of Iraq. In addition, there is the issue of disputed Kirkuk (claimed
by both the KRG and the central government out of Baghdad) and the issue
of oil and gas. There is also the matter of stature. The KRG needs a
prominent voice and Barzani's stature on the world stage has only grown
in the last years.

The KRG's two main political parties are the PUK and KDP. Barzani is a
member of the KDP., the most prominent member of the PUK is Jalal
Talabani, President of Iraq. Last December, Talabani suffered a
stroke. The incident took place late on December
17th (see the December 18th snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital. Thursday, December 20th,
he was moved to Germany. He remains in Germany currently. His medical
status is unclear and many are concerned that Kurdish power in Iraq
hangs in the balance.

At a time like this, it's not a surprise that over 60% of Kurds are in
favor of Jalal serving another term. Another term is not what is being
proposed. The Constitution limits the presidents to two terms and
Massoud Barzani is in his second term. However, that was passed after
he was elected to his first term and, in an attempt at fairness, the
proposed amendment would give him two more years with the understanding
that there will be no third term. Al Mada notes that the PUK has called this a "reasonable move" and that Barzani will not seek a third term.

MS. HARF: Yes.QUESTION: The departing UN envoy, Martin Kobler, made a very
sobering statement – that Iraq is sliding fast toward a civil war, and
furthermore that the Iraq and Syria wars are merging together with
combatants on both sides along sectarian lines taken. Do you have a
comment on that?MS. HARF: Well, we remain deeply concerned about the rise of
violent extremism and how it further endangers the future of Iraq and
all of Syria’s neighbors. We’ve spoken to that many times. The
Government of Iraq has itself also expressed its deep concern about the
level of violence in Syria and violent extremist elements who might seek
to capitalize on the situation in Syria to foment violence in Iraq. So
we would also like to make the point that the vast majorities of Iraqis –
of the Iraqi people continue to reject this violence, that we are
encouraged that many political and religious leaders have taken a strong
stance against this violence, and that we have continued to explore
ways to address these ongoing security issues going forward.

Iraq
Permanent envoy to the UN, the Ambassador, Mohamed al-Hakim, said
during the UNSC session held on last Tuesday to follow up the Secretary
General's report on the UNAMI "I would like to convey the Iraqi
government's request to prolong the UNAMI's mandate for one year
according to the terms adopted in the Security Council's resolution
No.1770 for 2007."

"The
Iraqi government called on the UNAMI to provide the logistic needs
required to secure the adequate number of the observers to ensure
transparent parliament elections scheduled in 2014," he added.
I stated this morning that we'd cover Kobler but we'll wait until either
tomorrow or Friday. There's not room today. Back to the press
conference, NSA whistle-blower Ed Snowden was briefly noted.

QUESTION: New topic? Snowden?

MS. HARF: Okay.QUESTION: Quick one. News reports allege that Mr. Snowden’s
getting very close to getting asylum in Russia. Do you have any comment
on that?MS. HARF: Our position on Mr. Snowden has not changed --QUESTION: Right.MS. HARF: -- that he is a wanted felon of the United States,
that he needs to be returned as quickly as possible. I don’t have any
updates for you on any of those reports.QUESTION: Have the Russians told you that they are getting close to granting him asylum?MS. HARF: I don’t have anything for you on that. We continue
to discuss with the Russian authorities our concerns about Mr. Snowden.
We continue to say that he needs to be returned to the United States.

As US House Rep John Conyers noted today, were it not for the
whistle-blowers like Ed Snowden, the spying on Americans would be
unknown. Secretly, without public discussion, the White House decides
to override the First and Fourth Amendments and does so via a secret
court ensuring further secrecy. This was (and is) spying on Americans.
There's no 'foreign' aspect to it. This is domestic spying, plain and
simple.